Apparently for LBs a lot of mocks have us takings one of these three with most likely Rivers as gholston will be gone.

I do not think A CB will be taken this high as plenty available and we could trade.

Anybody know how Rivers and Ellis are?????????? I am assuming rivers is more of a need for us & Better prospect??

Click to expand...

Not sure what Mocks you are looking at, but Ellis is NOT a LB. He's a DT.

Also, I don't believe that Keith Rivers is a good fit for the Pats 3-4 defense.

Ellis is actually the better prospect, but Ellis is viewed by many as strictly a 4-3 DT, which would translate into a 3-4 DE. And we don't need any more of those with Seymour, Warren, Green, Smith, and Wright already on the team.

But if that is the case I belive that if Gholston is not there and we cannot trade down we are screwed as we would have to verpay or take BPA?????

Click to expand...

Why would the Pats be screwed?

First and foremost, if you have Gholston being gone, What about Ryan, McFadden, Clady, Chris Long, Jake Long, and Glenn Dorsey?

ONE of those guys would fall to the Pats. If its Clady, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Pats take him and play him at RT.

That being said, the likelihood of the Pats NOT being able to trade down is very very slim. I believe that you will have teams like DENVER, CAROLINA, AND CHICAGO looking to trade up and I believe the Pats could get very good return in trade. At least 2 picks and possibly a 3rd.

Denver has needs on the O-line (Clady) and at DT(Dorsey/Ellis). Carolina also has needs at DE (Gholston, Groves, Harvey), DT (Dorsey,Ellis) and QB (Ryan). Chicago has needs at QB (Ryan).

Also, the Pats could trade back one with the Ravens so THEY can take Ryan and then the Pats could trade back AGAIN.

In the end, short of the Pats incomprehensibly taking McFadden, I don't see how the Pats could be screwed. They will add at least ONE quality player who will have an impact on this team.

That is what was said about the Patriots taking Logan Mankins. He's an ALL-PRO now.

Again, I'm sorry to disappoint you. But I disagree that the Patriots are screwed outside of trading down. That just isn't the case. You have to remember that the Patriots rank players differently than the scouting agencies. They have their own scouts and they don't necessarily rank players the way the agencies do. So, if the Pats STICK at 7 and draft someone, then they clearly felt they weren't reaching for the player and that they weren't screwed, as you put it.

Not a reach. But, Ryan Clady has a chance to be a very good T. Some think he's a better prospect than Jake Long. I'd rather have defense. But, if you can get a kid whom might be a 10-12 year starter and possible pro-bowler. That ain't all bad.

well let's think about it this way:
miami will take Long thats almost given because they have ronnie brown and can't take McFadden (like how houston took Mario instead of Bush because of Davis). Also they won't take Ryan because Parcels is smarter than that
Rams could go OL but i really think they will go with Dorsey because the only problem with their OL last year was injury. While they might go with OT Long to make that line a little younger, their defense was too bad to not spend the number 2 overall pick on.
With Dorsey gone, Falcons will take either McFadden (to fill stands in the absence of Vick) or Ryan. I think that the Falcons will go with Ryan because he would be better to rebuild their franchise around. McFadden is not the complete prospect that Peterson was at RB and thus will not be taken by the Falcons.
With Dorsey gone, Raiders will take McFadden because we all know Al Davis' pension for drafting freaks at their position.
Now the chiefs are the X factor for the patriots. If they draft Jake Long, which I think they will do, Pats should trade down because of the depth of the CB position in this draft. However, if the chiefs go CB Pats will be forced to take a CB because by the time their pick comes around in round 2 a lot of good corners will be off the board. Even if the Rams take Jake Long, Dorsey will be off the board (going to ATL), McFadden will still go to the Raiders, Ryan won't be a consideration for any team before the pats, and the Chiefs will most likely take Clady. So Pats won't have an OT to draft.
Considering Dorsey and McFadden will most certainly be off the board when the Jets get to pick they are going to take Gholston. I hate to say that but I think no matter what happens in picks 1-5, Jets are taking Gholston.
All this considered, Pats could go with a CB but I don't think they will. If Ryan is gone they can trade down with The Ravens and then Trade down again. If he's on the board, Ravens will not trade down because they know we won't take Ryan. In that case, we could trade down with the Saints so they can have their first choice CB. Either way Pats could trade down again.

So to answer the original question. Gholson will be gone, Rivers does not fit our system and Ellis would be a stupid pick considering Wilfork.

Best case we somehow land Gholston because McFadden somehow falls past the Raiders and Falcons and is taken by the Jets.
Realistically, I see the pats trading down, Taking the best available corner in the middle or bottom of the 1st and coming back around in the second and taking an OLB/DE in the second round. THis would hopefully be Groves. He's not as strong as Gholston but he is certainly faster.

well let's think about it this way:
miami will take Long thats almost given because they have ronnie brown and can't take McFadden (like how houston took Mario instead of Bush because of Davis). Also they won't take Ryan because Parcels is smarter than that
Rams could go OL but i really think they will go with Dorsey because the only problem with their OL last year was injury. While they might go with OT Long to make that line a little younger, their defense was too bad to not spend the number 2 overall pick on.
With Dorsey gone, Falcons will take either McFadden (to fill stands in the absence of Vick) or Ryan. I think that the Falcons will go with Ryan because he would be better to rebuild their franchise around. McFadden is not the complete prospect that Peterson was at RB and thus will not be taken by the Falcons.
With Dorsey gone, Raiders will take McFadden because we all know Al Davis' pension for drafting freaks at their position.
Now the chiefs are the X factor for the patriots. If they draft Jake Long, which I think they will do, Pats should trade down because of the depth of the CB position in this draft. However, if the chiefs go CB Pats will be forced to take a CB because by the time their pick comes around in round 2 a lot of good corners will be off the board. Even if the Rams take Jake Long, Dorsey will be off the board (going to ATL), McFadden will still go to the Raiders, Ryan won't be a consideration for any team before the pats, and the Chiefs will most likely take Clady. So Pats won't have an OT to draft.
Considering Dorsey and McFadden will most certainly be off the board when the Jets get to pick they are going to take Gholston. I hate to say that but I think no matter what happens in picks 1-5, Jets are taking Gholston.
All this considered, Pats could go with a CB but I don't think they will. If Ryan is gone they can trade down with The Ravens and then Trade down again. If he's on the board, Ravens will not trade down because they know we won't take Ryan. In that case, we could trade down with the Saints so they can have their first choice CB. Either way Pats could trade down again.

So to answer the original question. Gholson will be gone, Rivers does not fit our system and Ellis would be a stupid pick considering Wilfork.

Best case we somehow land Gholston because McFadden somehow falls past the Raiders and Falcons and is taken by the Jets.
Realistically, I see the pats trading down, Taking the best available corner in the middle or bottom of the 1st and coming back around in the second and taking an OLB/DE in the second round. THis would hopefully be Groves. He's not as strong as Gholston but he is certainly faster.

If the best player available for the Pats at #7 is rated in the 15-20 range, why not give someone a deal and trade down to 15-20 and pick up an extra 3rd, or 4th? God forbid it doesn't follow the trade value chart, but if that's how they rate him then it makes sense. If Gholston, Long or Long is not available, that's what I hope they do.

As would I. That would be insane. Someone always drops. The last couple of years it's been a qb. Miami has Ronnie Brown, Jackson in St. Louis. Atlanta just ponied up for Michael Turner. Oakland needs a running back, Chiefs have Larry J. Jets have Thomas Jones. So the only team we would have to worry about is Oakland.

Why would we take DE Long? I think we are pretty set at DL maybe a few injuries... am I missing something?

Also, if Jets take Gholston and McFadden is on the board and BB ponies up and drafts him that would be insane. I would buy that jersey instantly.

Click to expand...

That's exactly why the JETS should take McFadden. They would win the fans back, while the Pats have the better option to take a player that would fit on their team in Gholston.

As for Long, he is 272 (AD is 270), athletic, and smart. If there is one guy who could learn the OLB position quickly it would be him. In fact, I'd rather him play OLB then Gholston. He reminds me a lot of Jason Taylor which makes me think he will be selected #1 overall.

Very True. Maybe then we could trade with Dallas and get their 2 first rounders and some LB help. Carpenter?

Click to expand...

It's easy to visualize a trade like that, but picking in the top 10 can be a death wish. You're paying some unproven player so much money who can either bust, or not even contribute their first year (see JaMarcus Russell, Alex Smith, etc). And while all that money is locked up the team will continue to lose because it can't upgrade other positions. It's much safer to have picks later in the first round where you can still get a starter at a lot less cost.

If the best player available for the Pats at #7 is rated in the 15-20 range, why not give someone a deal and trade down to 15-20 and pick up an extra 3rd, or 4th? God forbid it doesn't follow the trade value chart, but if that's how they rate him then it makes sense. If Gholston, Long or Long is not available, that's what I hope they do.

Click to expand...

It's about time someone suggests this. :eat3: Far too much focus on the top 6.

It's easy to visualize a trade like that, but picking in the top 10 can be a death wish. You're paying some unproven player so much money who can either bust, or not even contribute their first year (see JaMarcus Russell, Alex Smith, etc). And while all that money is locked up the team will continue to lose because it can't upgrade other positions. It's much safer to have picks later in the first round where you can still get a starter at a lot less cost.

Click to expand...

Go back and look at what the players outside the top 3 got. Its not nearly as bad as you make it. I thought it was, until I read about Peterson's contract. the 5 year/$40 million was only if he hit every single escalator in his contractor. Two of those escalators were $1 mill increase each year for gaining 2000 yards as a rookie and a $1 mill per year increase in making 20 TDs. There is 10 million he'll never see. His contract will end up in the $4-$5 mill a year range, is my bet.

And, while it seems like a lot of money to you and me, when you have teams like Tampa at 42 million under the cap, its not.